🚀 go-pugleaf

***** Microsoft admits to baffling users (UK Computer Weekly 4 July 96)


MICROSOFT has admitted that it has left end-users in confusion over which
desktop operating system to adopt. The company is busy trying to
rectify this in time for the launch of Windows NT Workstation 4.0 (NTW4) in
August.

Many companies have put their migration from Windows 3.x to a 32-bit
desktop operating system on hold, in effect snubbing Windows 95, until NTW4
arrives and they can carry out a full evaluation.

Research company the Gartner Group has warned that current users of
Windows 95 would be foolish to ditch the software in favour of NTW4. It
claims Microsoft has slowed sales of Windows 95 into the corporate market
by sowing fear, uncertainty and doubt.

"I completely agree with any accusation that we have confused people over
which 32-bit operating system they should buy," said Anne Mitchard, desktop
systems marketing manager at Microsoft UK. "This is why we are going out to
educate our partners and customers with clear positioning of the
two products."

Mitchard claims that a reorganisation within Microsoft that put both
Windows 95 and NTW4 within the same group is helping it define
clear messages to users.

***** Is migration an option for Windows 95 users ? *****
         (UK Computer Weekly June 27 96)


Windows 95 users planning to migrate to the soon-to-be-launched Windows NT
Workstation 4.0 will have to start from scratch and spend hundreds of
man-hours reinstalling their business applications.  Neil Fawcett
explains why


Users of Windows 95 - which masquerades  as a 32-bit desktop operating
system - who are looking to migrate to NT Workstation 4.0 (NTW4) face a
technical nightmare.

Two months ago when NTW4 entered the beta test phase, Microsoft warned that
migration from Windows 95 to NTW4 would be plagued by problems.

But at its TechEd developers conference, held earlier this month in
Nice, Microsoft conceded that the process of moving from Windows 95 to NTW4
would be less of a problem for business users, and more like a nightmare.

Steve Madigan, director of Windows NT program management, told Computer
Weekly that the architectural differences between the two operating systems
were so significant that migration would be a major issue.

For example, a lack of guidance over how and where the Windows 95 operating
system installs applications creates a major problem for NTW4 when it tries
to upgrade a computer.  Third-party software, over which Microsoft has
no control, can install its main code to a root directory, such as
C:\PROG, but can also install .DLL files within various Windows directories
which are difficult to track.

"Trying to track what this software has done when it installs is a big, big
problem," said Madigan.

Because of the different ways in which Windows 95 and NTW4 track these
programs, information about where.DLL files or data files are stored
can be lost in the migration.

Microsoft now believes users wanting to upgrade early should"start
afresh" and delete Windows 95, install NTW4 and then re-install all
business applications from scratch.

Alternatively, users could ignore NTW4 and wait until 1997 when
Microsoft ships a version of Windows NT currently codenarned Memphis. The
move to Memphis, the supplier claims, will be a much smoother transition.

When Windows 95 was launched, Microsoft spent a lot of time, effort
and cash convincing users the migration from Windows 3.x to Windows 95
would be smooth and painless.

This is far from the case with NTW4. Chances are that an engineer will
have to spend well over 30 minutes at a user's desk installing the
operating system upgrade.

Another problem for IT departments will be device driver support for
NTW4. Just because Windows 95 supported your obscure graphics card that
you bought in bulk on a trip to Guatemala does not mean NTW4 will do the
same.


A  further consideration is support for Plug&Play (P&P), the automatic
detection of the hardware components within a PC. Although P&P is hardly a
robust technology, it is one of the key features of Windows 95 and played
an important  part in persuading Windows 3.1 users to migrate. NTW4 does
not support P&P and will not do so until 1997, when Memphis ships.

The technical problems of migration are rather nasty, but obvious. What is
less clear is whether a user needs to embark on such a painful migration.

Only Microsoft knows the answer.  Or does it?

------------- Sidebar comment -------------------------------------------

Making the right choice

I can't believe users are contemplating doing this,' said Simon Levin,
research director of Gartner Group in the UK, commenting on NTW4 migration.

Levin argues the predicament Microsoft now finds itself in is rooted more
in having been unclear with the messages it gave users a year ago, rather
than the technical issues. He does, however, believe migration from Windows
95 to NTW4 will be beset by problems.

'You have to look at what class of operating system and application you
want for your users.  For a bank that wants robustness and security for
their own applications, NTW4 is a good choice.  But for many, Windows 95
is a good, general-purpose 32-bit operating system," he added.

Gartner group stands firm behind the belief that Windows 95 is as good a
business pperating system as NTW4, so long as a company has considered its
needs carefully.  Levin is also in agreement with Microsoft that Windows
95 users should wait until 1997 to see what is on offer, and then make a
decision to migrate if necessary.

Gartner Group believes as little as 15% of desktops in the average UK
company will be running Windows NT, with Windows 95 and Windows 3.x
accounting for the rest.

***** Microsoft admits limited HT security *****
       (UK Computing 4 July 96)

Microsoft has admitted the C2 security rating it has claimed for Windows NT
only applies to the operating system running on standalone machines with
all floppy disk drives disabled.

The company said that because of the NTFSDOS share-,vare utility, which can
be used to reboot an NT machine and bypass its password protection, NT
machines are not C2-rated unless the floppy drives are disabled.

Phil Cross, Microsoft product marketing manager, said 'no floppies'was a
general requirement of the C2 rating, issued by the Computer National
Security Centre (NCSC).  But last week the NCSC denied this and insisted
the rating 'is not intended to prevent any physical hardware penetrations
to the system'.

The NCSC refused to confirm Microsoft's claims that NT's standalone C2
rating will be upgraded to network status this year.  Microsoft said it
never intended to mislead users into believing the system was rated as
anything other than standalone.  'We always said "designed for C2
security",'Cross said.

Bryce Cogswell, a research associate at the University of Oregon, who
coauthored NTFSDOS, said: 'This means anyone can come into your office with
a bootable DOS and NTFSDOS and get at the files on the machine.'